Digital IR

[Peter De Smidt]

Just a test image:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/6fjahhode8x0qvz/Infrared_Test.jpg?raw=1

D600 + 20AF + Hoya R72 + EI100+ f/8 + a combo of a 30s and 60s exposure.

[tuco]

It looks good. I think it also looks more 3D.

[Peter De Smidt]

Thanks, Tuco. I don't know why I didn't try this years ago.

[Tin Can]

It does look great!




Just a test image:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/6fjahhode8x0qvz/Infrared_Test.jpg?raw=1

D600 + 20AF + Hoya R72 + EI100+ f/8 + a combo of a 30s and 60s exposure.

[Ari]

What made you combine two long exposures, Peter?
It looks great, btw.

[Peter De Smidt]

Thanks Randy!

Ari, the clouds were better in one of them, but in that one the sun came out directly, and I didn't like the look of the buildings as much.

[Willie]

What is "20AF"?

I know ISO and the rest but this one is not something I am familiar with. AF - is AutoFocus?

[Peter De Smidt]

Hi Willie,

That stands for my old Nikkor 20mm AF lens.

Here's the main file right out of camera:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/h8qbsdwq7r41cm1/IR_straight.PNG?raw=1

[Tin Can]

I like this version better!


Hi Willie,

That stands for my old Nikkor 20mm AF lens.

Here's the main file right out of camera:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/h8qbsdwq7r41cm1/IR_straight.PNG?raw=1

[Peter De Smidt]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/rgunsdvvxy3yzml/IR_Garden_4.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/x9hj9ad8u4msqzp/IR_Garden_3.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/6gyler1o2pivs8i/IR_Garden_2.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/1seogydn0vhgfh6/IR_Garden.jpg?raw=1

[jon.oman]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/rgunsdvvxy3yzml/IR_Garden_4.jpg?raw=1



I really like this one Peter!

[Leszek Vogt]

[QUOTE=Peter De Smidt;1602198]https://www.dropbox.com/s/rgunsdvvxy3yzml/IR_Garden_4.jpg?raw=1

V. elegant, Peter. Also like the last one....and don't have a reasonable explanation why :>).

Les

[Tin Can]

I have seen these homes IRL

Looking good both ways

[Peter De Smidt]

Thank you, Gentleman! If some of my older acquaintances can be trusted, back in the 1950s the house was a bordello.

[Peter De Smidt]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/4v31zyxmx59pr93/_DSC7987-Edit.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/cz7o8nexsu9e9ru/_DSC7985-Edit.jpg?raw=1

[Greg]

Just got my Nikon Z6 back from being converted to IR. 20 minutes ago went to one of my favorite places in town. This is one of the first shots I took with my 24-70mm Z lens. To have auto focus work with IR floors me after having to refocus my lenses when shooting IR up to now. Only bummer was that my 24-200mm Z lens produces an unacceptable hot spot in the center of the frame. Second shot done with 70mm VK70R Kiyohara lens.

[Peter De Smidt]

Those are neat, Greg. What conversion did you go with?

[Greg]

Those are neat, Greg. What conversion did you go with?

LifePixel's Super Color IR

[LabRat]

Thank you, Gentleman! If some of my older acquaintances can be trusted, back in the 1950s the house was a bordello.

Don't dig up the basement!!! :-0

Steve K

[Willie]

Anyone have some images that show a direct comparison in B&W of a filter used compared to a converted IR camera body?

I read about the conversions and have used the IR filter in the past. Just don't have a solid comparison to help making the decision to get/buy an

IR specific body. My interest is B&W, not any color at all.

[Peter De Smidt]

The big difference is the converted cameras are faster, and you can see through the viewfinder. When I put the R72 filter on, I can't see anything. So that use is strictly tripod-only. The color ir filters give more tonal information to make a BW out of, and you can make funky color photos. For instance, when I convert my D600 files to BW, the red, orange and yellow sliders are the only color sliders that have an effect. With the color ir filters, you'd have more color that you could adjust in the conversion, and there might be less of a chance of banding, not that I've seen any so far in my limited use with a filter on lens method. Lifepixel has sample photos made with the different filters on their site.

[Peter De Smidt]

Don't dig up the basement!!! :-0

Steve K

Apparently, the owners now live in the basement, and the house is registered as a museum. They open it one weekend a year, but we've never been able to make it so far.

[Tom Monego]

Leica M8, 25mm f3.5 Canon, R72 1/60 f5.6 at ISO 320
216460

216461

The M8 does IR easily, but it is basically a dead end camera if anything goes wrong with it.

[Peter De Smidt]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/0teirpk6htsynq6/_DSC7992-Edit.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/n9xx7gmkus008u8/Railroad_Bridge.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/86coezj1mj1hv2w/Railraod_Bridge_2.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/uksycgqd8e7jzlg/Railroad_Bridge_3.jpg?raw=1

[Pat Kearns]

Peter, this is a great series of the train tressel. Bravo!
Regards,
Pat

[Peter De Smidt]

Thanks, Pat!

[Tin Can]

Agree

[Peter De Smidt]

Thanks, Randy
https://www.dropbox.com/s/e9c5if8hgrozo93/Carousel.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/c3afdrkgf26w6c8/Bridge_Tree.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/c8i702y0wcoeza2/Bridge.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ww2upqbq4syansl/canoes.jpg?raw=1

[Peter De Smidt]

[img]https://www.dropbox.com/s/hjv7bybd4vn1vdy/Railroad_Bridge_5.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/2nwfyfy9d56gnd1/Cottonwood.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/bef9o56nsiu24ll/Fountain.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/9fuovs14vf33x2y/Italianate_House_3.jpg?raw=1

[jon.oman]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/86coezj1mj1hv2w/Railraod_Bridge_2.jpg?raw=1



Nice, nice, nice!

[Peter De Smidt]

Thanks, Jon!

[Peter De Smidt]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/0vvg82jhbpw2lxi/_DSC8037-Edit2.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ii2axa4vmk9k257/_DSC8038-Edit2.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/26u8w7agcp7h6nd/_DSC8040-Edit.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/rg9izk3poorsjxi/_DSC8041-HDR-Edit.jpg?raw=1

[Andrew O'Neill]

Just a test image:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/6fjahhode8x0qvz/Infrared_Test.jpg?raw=1

D600 + 20AF + Hoya R72 + EI100+ f/8 + a combo of a 30s and 60s exposure.


Great images, Peter. Are you working with a non-converted camera with just the R72 on the lens? If so, I'm amazed. I have a D850 and have shot with the R72. Got great IR effect but always with a hot spot in the centre of the image.

[Peter De Smidt]

Thanks, Andrew. Yep, I'm just using an R72 filter on a regular D600. By any chance, were you using a zoom lens? Did you cover the viewfinder during exposure?

[Andrew O'Neill]

Thanks, Andrew. Yep, I'm just using an R72 filter on a regular D600. By any chance, were you using a zoom lens?


Yes, I was. Could that be the issue? Should I try a prime? I do have a wide angle prime.

[Peter De Smidt]

Give it a try. I've only used primes. Make sure to cover the viewfinder. According to Lifepixel, some lenses are known to cause hot spots.

[Andrew O'Neill]

Give it a try. I've only used primes. Make sure to cover the viewfinder. According to Lifepixel, some lenses are known to cause hot spots.


Thanks, Peter. I'll give it a shot later today. Thanks for the viewfinder tip, too!

[Peter De Smidt]

I have an extended silicone cup viewfinder hood. A rear Nikkor lens cap fits over it perfectly.

I hope it works out for you!

[Peter De Smidt]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/zxwgykzpwtu1zqn/_DSC8048-HDR-Edit.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/5fugaz4vdkdezc7/_DSC8052-Edit.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/42k6150nbvx9mx5/_DSC8054-Edit.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/7frjib2i09b20m3/_DSC8057-Edit.jpg?raw=1

[Andrew O'Neill]

Peter, I tried the wide prime on a D850, with the R72, and I couldn't really see an issue. I did though, with the 87C filter. Brutally long exposures that took ages for the camera to "process" the image, before I could preview it. I'll wait for an IR day to try it again...

[Peter De Smidt]

Andrew, that's good news. It's my understanding is that most digital cameras have an IR blocking filter. So my results are more like using an extended red film, such as Ilford's SFX 200 film.

[peter brooks]

I've spent years looking at the Large Format pages and have only just started looking at these 'other' pages - even more years of enjoyment to come!

Back in 2013 I converted a D200 to IR, broadly following instructions from the internet (not there anymore but here is a Wayback machine link (https://web.archive.org/web/20130130183456/http://kevincollinsphoto.smugmug.com/Exotic-Spectra/Near-Infrared/D200-DIY-IR-Conversion/7467474_5np2nb)).

It was a fairly fraught experience taking the camera to bits. I cut a piece of Edmund Optics longpass filter (750nm) and installed it in place of the anti-aliasing glass.

Would it work? Would there be bucket loads of dust everywhere? Would the focus be thrown way out?

It worked fine, far better than I could have imagined. I must use it more.

https://live.staticflickr.com/3953/15342785607_1260c836a4_o.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pnMMCk)
Yew hedge (https://flic.kr/p/pnMMCk) by Peter Brooks (https://www.flickr.com/photos/119783084@N04/)

https://live.staticflickr.com/2942/15448655825_feccb7f63d_o.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/px9p9V)
Croquet (https://flic.kr/p/px9p9V) by Peter Brooks (https://www.flickr.com/photos/119783084@N04/)
They look like they are playing on flour (those in the UK may remember the McDougalls flour men).

https://live.staticflickr.com/7497/16319569702_bf4b24fa36_o.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/qS74vq)
Stagshaw House (https://flic.kr/p/qS74vq) by Peter Brooks (https://www.flickr.com/photos/119783084@N04/)
False colour (colours inverted in PS)

[peter brooks]

Got great IR effect but always with a hot spot in the centre of the image.

Andrew, this is most likely down to the lens, not all are IR friendly. Bjørn Rørslett on his Nikon Lens Evaluations (http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_surv.html) pages often states whether a lens is suitable for IR or not... I tested all my Nikon lenses and some displayed really nasty hot spots.

His recommendation for the older 28 mm f/3.5 with a small exit pupil is absolutely spot on (I luckily found an AI'd copy). I was also pleased to find that the cheap but reasonable performing 18-55mm kit lens that came with the D200 was also very well behaved for IR :)

[Andrew O'Neill]

Andrew, this is most likely down to the lens, not all are IR friendly. Bjørn Rørslett on his Nikon Lens Evaluations (http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_surv.html) pages often states whether a lens is suitable for IR or not... I tested all my Nikon lenses and some displayed really nasty hot spots.

His recommendation for the older 28 mm f/3.5 with a small exit pupil is absolutely spot on (I luckily found an AI'd copy). I was also pleased to find that the cheap but reasonable performing 18-55mm kit lens that came with the D200 was also very well behaved for IR :)


Thank you, Peter. I tested with a 20mm lens, and it seemed to work okay with the R72. I'll have to do more testing, though to make certain. I've got lots of 18-55mm lenses for the photo program I teach, but sadly their Canon.

[Peter De Smidt]

Nice work, Peter!

[Greg]

Just passing on some of my observations and experiences...

All my AI converted and AIS MF Nikkors work great for shooting IR - 20mm, 24mm, 35mm, 85mm, 135mm, 200mm, and 300mm. No hot spots.
Both my MF AIS Zoom Nikkors have hot spots - 35-105 & 35-135 MF AIS Nikkors.
600mm & 800mm Vivitar Series 1 mirror lenses are great for shooting IF - very unique images. Ironically out of focus doughnuts seem to almost disappear.
My AF-S Zoom Nikkors work great for shooting IR - 14-24, 24-70, & 200-500mm. 80-200mm AF ED still have to test.
24-70 Z Nikkor - great for IR, no hot spots at all.
24-200 Z Nikkor - hot spots especially at its longer focal lengths. Unfortunately unuseable.
70mm f/5 VK70R & 120mm SMC PENTAX SOFT produce amazing IR images.
Posted lists of lenses producing or not producing hot spots - I only agree with 90% of their listings. Maybe manufacturers made minor changes in the production of their lenses? Or?
Post production correction of the hot spot using PS: For B&W, can be done but a pain to do. For Color, given enough skill, time, and patience most probably could be done.

First camera to shoot IR with: Nikon D2h was great at the time for shooting IR with an IR filter on the lens. The D2h either didn't have an IR filter over its sensor or a very minor one. Resulting images were rather grainy but very, very usable.
Second camera: an IR converted D700. Compensating for refocusing for shooting IR a pain for "grab" shots.
Third camera: Finally bit the bullet and just recently had my (third camera) Nikon Z6 converted for shooting IR.... never looked back and with absolutely no regrets. 10,000% better than shooting with the IR converted D700. Viewing the IR image in the finder is just a pleasure to use. AF is dead on.

FYI: in the 1980s and 1990s, I commercially shot 4x5 architecture IR images with a Sinar Hand and 47mm and 65mm optics. Final prints were 20x24 inches and larger. Honestly prefer those final prints to the ones I am now making with the IR converted Z6, but then I may be comparing apples to oranges... Also just starting to get to know the IR converted Z6.

[Andrew O'Neill]

I ordered a cheap IR filter set consisting of four filters, from China, that vary in strength. 680, 720, 760, 850, 950nm. My current R72 is quite worn out, as I've been using it forever. Consists of two pieces of glass, that have started to rattle around its housing ring.

[Peter De Smidt]

Good stuff, Greg! So far I've used the following lenses successfully:

Nikkor 20mm AF,
Nikkor 28mm AF,
Nikkor 35mm AIS,
Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D
Micro Nikkor 105D

[Peter De Smidt]

Andrew, I'll be very curious to find out how the 680nm filter works out. I expect it's give a good IR effect while being significantly faster than the R72.

[Andrew O'Neill]

Good stuff, Greg! So far I've used the following lenses successfully:

Nikkor 20mm AF,
Nikkor 28mm AF,
Nikkor 35mm AIS,
Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D
Micro Nikkor 105D

Thanks, Peter.

[Andrew O'Neill]

Andrew, I'll be very curious to find out how the 680nm filter works out. I expect it's give a good IR effect while being significantly faster than the R72.

I'll let you know!

[Audii-Dudii]

I hate to be a naysayer, but while I find Peter's photos visually appealing overall, to my eyes, they all appear to be noticeably softer than I would expect from my digital IR setup, which consists of a DIY converted, full-spectrum Samsung NX500 and various Contax and Contax N series lenses with a Hoya R72 filter mounted on them.

Because mine is a mirrorless camera and I would be using it exclusively with adapted, manual focus lenses, I didn't have to worry about any focus shift caused by removing the hot filter / cover glass assembly ahead of the sensor, so I simply removed it (along with the dust-shaker mechanism, which is part of the stack) and didn't replace it with anything. I did, however, take some test photos and adjust the sensor position very slightly using the factory's three spring-loaded adjustment screws to accommodate the lenses FFD (because a few of them have floating and/or aspherical elements, which are very demanding in this respect).

As a result of my modification (which, btw, can be easily reversed should I ever wish to do so), I can shoot (and do!) shoot handheld as well as from a tripod. With only one or maybe two exceptions, all y C/Y and Contax N lenses perform well at f5.6 and f8, with at worst, a very faint hot-spot that effectively mimics adding a very minor (1/6th stop) vignette during post-processing. Other families of lenses I've tried have not performed nearly so well.

But back to Peter's photos: My guess as to what's happening is that because he has to compose and focus without the IR filter attached, he's experiencing some amount of focus shift after he subsequently installs it. In the old days, this is the reason why lenses had IR marks on their focus rings, but these started disappearing once the first autofocus lenses appeared, so photographing in IR can be tricky when using a DSLR instead of a mirrorless camera, where this shift is not an issue because WYSIWYG.

FYI, one advantage to using an IR filter on the lens instead of mounted on the sensor is that it's possible to photograph full-spectrum, without using a filter at all. Although there isn't much IR light present from natural sources at night, there can be lots of it created by artificial light sources, so IR photography at night is definitely possible when using a dedicated IR camera.

Here's an example of a full-spectrum photo taken at night:

https://i.imgur.com/1ZvEVRA.jpg

Personally, I like the soft glow that results from different frequencies of light focusing at slightly different distances, but YMMV.

And as proof that nighttime IR photography is possible, I offer the following examples:

https://i.imgur.com/RZFbOQB.jpg

The majority of the scene in the above photo s illuminated by a nearby streetlight and the different color temperature of the light mounted on the garage wall causes it to appear very different indeed.

and in this photo, the only source of light is the one mounted on the garage wall:

https://i.imgur.com/k3Lz1DL.jpg

Finally, to address my original point, here's one of my handheld daylight IR photos, showing just how bitingly sharp an IR photo converted to B&W can be:

https://i.imgur.com/KSLwbMG.jpg

Note: It's not my intention to be critical of Peter's photos, assuming he achieved this look intentionally (IMO, it does work well for several of his photos), I'm only pointing out that if it wasn't intentional, different results are very much possible!216561

[Peter De Smidt]

I hate to be a naysayer, but while I find Peter's photos visually appealing overall, to my eyes, they all appear to be noticeably softer than I would expect from my digital IR setup, which consists of a DIY converted, full-spectrum Samsung NX500 and various Contax and Contax N series lenses with a Hoya R72 filter mounted on them.


Sure. The main advantage of my system, for me anyway, is that I already have it. :)

I've photographed the railroad bridge with 8x10. Those photos have oodles more detail than my digital IR photos. I like my recent IR photos better.

[Tin Can]

Agree!

[Audii-Dudii]

Sure. The main advantage of my system, for me anyway, is that I already have it. :)

You'll get no argument from me on this point!


I've photographed the railroad bridge with 8x10. Those photos have oodles more detail than my digital IR photos. I like my recent IR photos better.

Hey, it's your photography, so you should photograph whatever you want and use whatever equipment makes you happy! :)

That said, I've noticed I have the same feelings about the majority of the photos I've taken with my 8x10 and my digital cameras. Which is that despite capturing significantly more detail, I also prefer my digital photos to my 8x10 transparencies as well!

[Peter De Smidt]

JG, it is a very good suggestion to check for focus shift. Most of my lenses have an IR mark, and a test wouldn't be hard to do, but it'll have to wait a week or so, as tomorrow I'm going on my first vacation in a very long time. My hypothesis is that I'm really using near infrared, and so there will be a smaller shift than if using an IR system that works at more true IR wave lengths.

[Audii-Dudii]

JG, it is a very good suggestion to check for focus shift. Most of my lenses have an IR mark, and a test wouldn't be hard to do, but it'll have to wait a week or so, as tomorrow I'm going on my first vacation in a very long time.

Lucky you! It's been more than a decade since I last had a real vacation and I don't see one happening any time soon. :(


My hypothesis is that I'm really using near infrared, and so there will be a smaller shift than if using an IR system that works at more true IR wave lengths.

You are very likely correct, especially as I don't know to which bandpass frequency the infrared mark on a lens has been calibrated.

Switching gears, I apologize for my initial post here. Reading it again just now (and also refreshing myself as to the intended purpose of this particular sub-forum), I realize I interrupted an on-going conversation and derailed it completely.

I don't know about you, but I hate it when this happens to me at parties and I hate it even more when I do it to someone else without realizing it!

I don't know if I can delete my post, but I'm happy to try doing so and/or to edit it and tamp-down my tone ... mea culpa! <blushes>

[Peter De Smidt]

No worries! You brought up some good issues.

[Andrew O'Neill]

I really can't see there being much if any focus shift with just the R72 filter. I've used this filter for decades on HIE, Efke IR, Rollie IR, and have never noticed any shift. I do however, see it with a wratten 87C opaque filter on HIE.

[Peter De Smidt]

Just got back from our trip. It was a lot of fun! Lot's of great stuff to see. I did find out that my Nikkor AF50 f/1.8D has a hot spot in IR the shape of the aperture. It's not large, and it shouldn't be hard to remove in post, but it's something to be aware of.

[Peter De Smidt]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/a7grew2icuotlwu/Theresa_GM.jpg?raw=1
Theresa Gold Mine, Goldfield, CO

[Tin Can]

Great image!


https://www.dropbox.com/s/a7grew2icuotlwu/Theresa_GM.jpg?raw=1
Theresa Gold Mine, Goldfield, CO

[jon.oman]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/a7grew2icuotlwu/Theresa_GM.jpg?raw=1
Theresa Gold Mine, Goldfield, CO

Very nice!

[Peter De Smidt]

Thanks, Jon!

https://www.dropbox.com/s/lz5r853ae1c5znb/Theresa_GM_2.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/rjve5c8gr8r2ybm/High_Trail_1.jpg?raw=1

[Peter De Smidt]

I just did a careful focus test using a Nikon 50mm f/1.4D lens set at f/2. I focused without a filter using live view, after which I installed a Hoya R72 filter and took photos without adjustment, adjusted half way to the IR mark, and fully to the IR mark on the lens. With that lens, filter and my D600, the sharpest photo was the one with focus adjusted to the IR mark. I highly recommend testing with your own gear if you're going to do this. In addition, the F1.4 didn't exhibit the hot spot that the f/1.8 did.

[Peter De Smidt]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/bbqd4jkopay92ma/_DSC8341-HDR-Edit.jpg?raw=1

[Willie]

In looking at the images of Mitch Dobrowner - is he shooting InfraRed on some of them? The Los Angeles area images look like it as do some of his scenic images. Take a look at a few in the link below.

https://www.photoeye.com/gallery/forms2/index.cfm?image=1&id=195494&imagePosition=1&Door=1&Portfolio=Portfolio4&Gallery=1&Page=#LBimage011

[Peter De Smidt]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/5cqnq2819e99pqd/Pike%27s%20Peak%20View%20West.jpg?raw=1
Pike's Peak View West

https://www.dropbox.com/s/hp90qgqaejzuwpe/Pike%27s%20Peak%20View%20West%202.jpg?raw=1

A fire in Utah caused the distant haze.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/rewlnidwsit0ygf/Up%20On%20Cripple%20Creek.jpg?raw=1
Up On Cripple Creek

[Bill Rolph]

Here's one of mine, taken at Yellowstone a few days ago on an Olympus E-PL1 at 950nm.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51252837519_a3155860e0_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2m63bYp)Infrared #5 (https://flic.kr/p/2m63bYp) by Bill (https://www.flickr.com/photos/149475521@N02/), on Flickr

[Peter De Smidt]

Excellent work, Bill!

[tuco]

I like that too, Bill.

M9, Voigtländer Nokton 50mm, R72 filter

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51260350710_a9ee7302d9_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2m6GGob)
Maryhill, WA (https://flic.kr/p/2m6GGob) by tuco (https://www.flickr.com/photos/yo_tuco/), on Flickr

[Michael R]

Beautiful.


I like that too, Bill.

M9, Voigtländer Nokton 50mm, R72 filter

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51260350710_a9ee7302d9_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2m6GGob)
Maryhill, WA (https://flic.kr/p/2m6GGob) by tuco (https://www.flickr.com/photos/yo_tuco/), on Flickr

[Peter De Smidt]

That's a really good one, Tuco!

[tuco]

Beautiful.

Thanks


That's a really good one, Tuco!

Thanks. And those gold mine pictures look good.

[tuco]

A viewpoint along the freeway
M9, Voigtländer Nokton 50mm, R72 IR Filter

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51259614236_4bc0d4d3e7_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2m6CVsm)
Maryhill, WA (https://flic.kr/p/2m6CVsm) by tuco (https://www.flickr.com/photos/yo_tuco/), on Flickr

[Tin Can]

Wow!


A viewpoint along the freeway
M9, Voigtländer Nokton 50mm, R72 IR Filter

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51259614236_4bc0d4d3e7_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2m6CVsm)
Maryhill, WA (https://flic.kr/p/2m6CVsm) by tuco (https://www.flickr.com/photos/yo_tuco/), on Flickr

[Bill Rolph]

Thank you, Peter and Tuco.

[Ari]

Here's one of mine, taken at Yellowstone a few days ago on an Olympus E-PL1 at 950nm.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51252837519_a3155860e0_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2m63bYp)Infrared #5 (https://flic.kr/p/2m63bYp) by Bill (https://www.flickr.com/photos/149475521@N02/), on Flickr

Great stuff, Bill.
Are you using a 950nm filter on the lens, or is your camera converted to IR?
Thanks

[Bill Rolph]

Great stuff, Bill.
Are you using a 950nm filter on the lens, or is your camera converted to IR?
Thanks

Thanks Ari. This was with a 950nm filter on the lens, but I had also removed the IR blocking filter in front of the sensor so that the camera can see the full spectrum. It might be possible to shoot this wavelength on an unmodified camera, but the exposure durations would be extreme (even with the blocking filter removed, this exposure was 1/10s, f/7.1, 100 iso).

[Peter De Smidt]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/fvi5d91iydqrzwo/Theresa_GM_3.jpg?raw=1
Theresa Gold Mine 3

[Ari]

Thanks Ari. This was with a 950nm filter on the lens, but I had also removed the IR blocking filter in front of the sensor so that the camera can see the full spectrum. It might be possible to shoot this wavelength on an unmodified camera, but the exposure durations would be extreme (even with the blocking filter removed, this exposure was 1/10s, f/7.1, 100 iso).

Much appreciated, Bill.
The great work on this thread has me considering a converted digital camera, but I don't think anyone converts digital cameras to higher than 850nm.

[Bill Rolph]

Much appreciated, Bill.
The great work on this thread has me considering a converted digital camera, but I don't think anyone converts digital cameras to higher than 850nm.

It probably depends on the camera, but at least for my Olympus conversion was easy. Remove a couple screws and connectors to reach the sensor, then lift off the glass filter atop it. After that you can use it as a full spectrum camera, allowing for EIR type images like the one attached, or screw on an IR filter of any wavelength.

https://live.staticflickr.com/4461/37506801390_d4c7709f04.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/Z9maku)Digital EIR (https://flic.kr/p/Z9maku) by Bill (https://www.flickr.com/photos/149475521@N02/), on Flickr

[malexand]

216853 216854

Went to Alcatraz last week.
DIY modified Nikon D70 w/ Lee 87

[Peter De Smidt]

Well done, Matt. A bird in flight isn't something I couldn't get with just a filter on the lens. How hard was it to modify your D70?

[malexand]

Well done, Matt. A bird in flight isn't something I could get with just a filter on the lens. How hard was it to modify your D70?

Thanks Peter!
The D70 wasn't very hard to modify. There were a couple of thin-film ribbon cables that were a bit tricky to re-seat properly. But even with a couple of reassembles to get said ribbon cable correct, it didn't take more than an hour.

[peter brooks]

Wow, there's some great shots in this thread...

A couple in false colour:

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51261398397_cbb2840148_o.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2m6N4PK)
Infrared tree (https://flic.kr/p/2m6N4PK) by Peter Brooks (https://www.flickr.com/photos/119783084@N04/)

https://live.staticflickr.com/8609/16182350446_ee180b6582_o.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/qDYM1b)
Tree Roots (https://flic.kr/p/qDYM1b) by Peter Brooks (https://www.flickr.com/photos/119783084@N04/)

[Peter De Smidt]

Interesting photos, Peter. How was you camera modified for IR?

[Peter De Smidt]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/b32lu0zij202rrm/Lillie%20Main%20House.jpg?raw=1

Lillie Gold Mine - Main House

https://www.dropbox.com/s/rzyctuinl7uhtfm/Lillie%20%20GM.jpg?raw=1

Lillie Gold Mine

[Tin Can]

Peter, I assume that's not Lily mine

https://www.mining-technology.com/mining-safety/lily-gold-mine-scheduled-reopen-2020-following-disaster

[Peter De Smidt]

https://thediggings.com/mines/usgs10240124

[peter brooks]

Interesting photos, Peter. How was you camera modified for IR?

See post #42, but briefly I did the open-heart surgery myself (that's what it felt like anyway) - replaced the 'IR cut filter' that was in front of the D200 sensor with a piece cut from Edmund Optics long pass filter material (750 nm).

So it 'sees' permanently in IR but the viewfinder view is normal. Luckily auto-focus is still spot on (as is the result of manual focus).

I was trying to remember how I did the false colour shots (it was around eight years ago), I think it involved swapping the blue and red channels in photoshop. I'll try to work it out again!

Great mine shots BTW.

[tuco]

.. a piece cut from Edmund Optics long pass filter material (750 nm). So it 'sees' permanently in IR ...

I see tutorials on how to remove the filters for my D810 to get full spectrum. It looks straight forward enough. And I see someone will sell you a 750nm filter to install over the sensor. Is there much different between the full-spectrum converted to BW vs one that has the 750nm filter installed?

[Ari]

I bit the bullet and bought an older Sony A-mount camera and lens and will have it converted professionally.
I'm going to get a full 830nm or 850nm B&W conversion done, as I don't want to mess with additional filters and slower shutter speeds.
From what I understand, the light loss is only 2-3 stops if the camera is converted, vs 5-6 (or more) stops if you use filters on the lens.

Tuco, the LifePixel website has lots of good information: https://www.lifepixel.com/photo-tutorials/infrared-photoshop-videos

[Peter De Smidt]

If you have full spectrum, you'd need to use a filter on the lens for Vis, IR or UV. Since these focus light differently, this could lead to focus mismatches.

Ari, you might consider the super-color filter. If you use a BW adjustment layer, you can adjust the BW image quite extensively using the color controls. In particular, you'd be able to adjust the sky/folliage balance using the color controls instead of needing fancy masks.

[tuco]

Good info. Thanks you guys. My D810 hardly gets used. I think it's going to have a new, special purpose.

[Ari]

Ari, you might consider the super-color filter. If you use a BW adjustment layer, you can adjust the BW image quite extensively using the color controls. In particular, you'd be able to adjust the sky/folliage balance using the color controls instead of needing fancy masks.

Considered that, Peter. But I'd like to get images done in-camera as much as possible, and not spend more time on the computer.
Also I want to avoid using on-camera filters if possible, and I'll see if anyone can install a filter as strong as 900nm-950nm.
Definitely will be a one-trick pony, but I hope to concentrate on the image as much as possible, and less on the process.

[Peter De Smidt]

Sounds good, Ari.

Tuco, I look forward to hearing how it works out. I might get a D810 to convert.

[peter brooks]

Some less-than-bright-sunlight IR shots taken in April (2014) - barely spring in the north of England.

https://live.staticflickr.com/3935/15244364067_cc4f436a94_o.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pe6mke)
Churchyard (https://flic.kr/p/pe6mke) by Peter Brooks (https://www.flickr.com/photos/119783084@N04/)
Looks oversharpened but there's just an incredible amount of detail in the foliage of these Yew trees.
I do find this venerable old MF 28mm f3.5 lens (42mm on the sensor size) to be very sharp.


https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51266208274_f32bb5b6dd_o.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2m7dHCE)
Churchyard chair (https://flic.kr/p/2m7dHCE) by Peter Brooks (https://www.flickr.com/photos/119783084@N04/)
Even when used in lower light levels IR seems to bring special qualities to images. (Same lens).

[Peter De Smidt]

Those have appealing tonality in the foliage.

[Peter De Smidt]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/qlmv7dcsweynoh1/White_Path.jpg?raw=1

[Tin Can]

Like!


https://www.dropbox.com/s/qlmv7dcsweynoh1/White_Path.jpg?raw=1

[Michael R]

Very nice!


https://www.dropbox.com/s/qlmv7dcsweynoh1/White_Path.jpg?raw=1

[Ari]

Yep, pretty good, Peter.

[Peter De Smidt]

Thank you, Gentlemen.

[jon.oman]

A few from me. I may have posted these before. Thought they would go well here.

http://www.gophotog.org/allphotos/magnolia6/large_photos/DSC_2195.jpg

http://www.gophotog.org/allphotos/magnolia6/large_photos/DSC_2198.jpg

http://www.gophotog.org/allphotos/magnolia6/large_photos/DSC_2177.jpg

http://www.gophotog.org/allphotos/magnolia6/large_photos/DSC_2183.jpg

[Peter De Smidt]

Those are wonderful, Jon!

[jon.oman]

Thanks Peter!

[tuco]

Wow, that one really rocks, Peter.

[Peter De Smidt]

:) The whole trip was kinda rocky. Thanks, Tuco!

[Andrew O'Neill]

Testing D850 (not IR converted) with Komei IR filters 680, and 720. The 720 (and 680, for that matter) considerably darker than my other 720 filter, making it challenging to focus. But if I cupped my hand around my eye, I could see the image enough to focus... there was considerable focus shift.
The image on the left was taken with the 680. The one on the right was with the 720. I shot with ISO 100. Exposures at f/8. 5sec for the 680, and 8 seconds for the 720. No hot spot. Lens was the 20mm 1.8G. I will also test the 720 and 850 with Rollie IR film.

[Peter De Smidt]

Good stuff, Andrew. Thanks for sharing!

[John Brady]

216964216961216962216963

These are from a trip to Cuba, captured with a Sony a7r converted to ir.

___________________
www.timeandlight.com

[Peter De Smidt]

Excellent, John! What conversion did you have done?

[jon.oman]

216964216961216962216963

These are from a trip to Cuba, captured with a Sony a7r converted to ir.

___________________
www.timeandlight.com

Very nice! Cuba is on my bucket list.....

[Greg]

Beach Rock, Barkhamsted CT

[Kirk Gittings]

[QUOTE=Peter De Smidt;1602626]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/86coezj1mj1hv2w/Railraod_Bridge_2.jpg?raw=1

Dude, very nicely done.

[Peter De Smidt]

Thanks, Kirk!

https://www.dropbox.com/s/kc280wnqsmsfqce/GG_IR.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/t9jdtmhx2lf9syw/Take%202.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/07k9kr5vrielnhe/_DSC8257-Edit-2.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/snz0fyzjximxc2s/GG_Center.jpg?raw=1

[Peter De Smidt]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/vcmex2u8mfejgel/_DSC8278.jpg?raw=1

[Andrew O'Neill]

Really happy to see that my Nikkor 24-70 2.8G lens works really well with my 720 filter (Zomei). I tested it at 24mm and at 70mm. No hot spot.

[Peter De Smidt]

That's good news, Andrew!

[Peter De Smidt]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ybn59ruo19mz8xk/Balanced_Rock.jpg?raw=1
Balanced Rock

https://www.dropbox.com/s/bnmua798puooq3x/_DSC8297-Edit.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/7b5do9pubp3dih3/_DSC8298-Edit.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/8z9kw0f9h8r5aj4/_DSC8126-Edit.jpg?raw=1

[jon.oman]

Yesterday's walk in the park.

https://www.gophotog.org/allphotos/infrared/large_photos/D7F_5952.jpg

https://www.gophotog.org/allphotos/infrared/large_photos/D7F_5955.jpg

https://www.gophotog.org/allphotos/infrared/large_photos/D7F_5956.jpg

[jon.oman]

By the way Peter, I like your 'rock' series. Where are these anyway?

[Peter De Smidt]

Good ones, Jon! Most of my recent pictures are from Garden of the Gods, which is just outside of Colorado Springs.

[Daniel Unkefer]

I have photographed some of these very rocks with my 4x5 Norma back in the late 80's.

[Peter De Smidt]

Daniel, do you have any scans? I'd love to see some of them.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/oqem8v16lix9ejj/_DSC8070-Edit.jpg?raw=1

[Daniel Unkefer]

"Daniel, do you have any scans? I'd love to see some of them."

Here you go, Peter!

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49806235316_be6d9bb672_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2iTcYx7)Garden of the Gods Colorado 1992 (https://flic.kr/p/2iTcYx7) by Nokton48 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/18134483@N04/), on Flickr

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49806576642_21dcd9a9e3_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2iTeJ13)Garden of the Gods Colorado 1992 2 (https://flic.kr/p/2iTeJ13) by Nokton48 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/18134483@N04/), on Flickr

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49494974031_c184321104_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2ipGFpe)Garden of the Gods 1 (https://flic.kr/p/2ipGFpe) by Nokton48 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/18134483@N04/), on Flickr

From 30 day photo trip to Colorado Autumn 1992. 4x5 and some 8x10 Sinar Norma, original Sinar Norma lenses, HP5 (not +) processed one side of holder in D76 1:1, other side PMK Pyro+. I have 90+ negatives from this trip and some I have not printed. I lived in Colorado for a while and it was like returning home

[Peter De Smidt]

Those are really nice, Daniel. I wish I could've taken my LF kit along, but it wasn't in the cards.

[jon.oman]

A few today from Magnolia Gardens. Processed them a bit differently.

https://www.gophotog.org/allphotos/infrared/large_photos/D7F_5972.jpg

https://www.gophotog.org/allphotos/infrared/large_photos/D7F_5993.jpg

https://www.gophotog.org/allphotos/infrared/large_photos/D7F_5983.jpg

I really need to take a trip this summer. Just somewhere different!

[Peter De Smidt]

Those are wild (and fun), Jon!

[Ari]

Cheapest way to do digital IR, if you already have a dumbphone.

217062

iPhone while holding the IR72 filter in front of the lens.
De-saturated, then adjusted levels in PS.

[Peter De Smidt]

Wow, Ari. That's much better than I expected!

I just stepped outside and took a picture with my OnePlus 7t through the R72:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/jw4fettihsy0xog/IR_test.jpg?raw=1

[Ari]

There ya go, Peter. Nice going.
I'm sure mine could look better if I did some fancy channel mixing stuff, but it's ok as a snapshot.
The hardest part was not getting my fingers in the view. My filter is a small 46mm.
There are filter holders for phones available online.

[tuco]

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51279711231_37bc9261a8_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2m8pVAg)
River Walk (https://flic.kr/p/2m8pVAg) by tuco (https://www.flickr.com/photos/yo_tuco/), on Flickr

M9, Voigtländer Nokton 50mm, R72

[Peter De Smidt]

Nicely done, Tuco.

[tuco]

Nicely done, Tuco.

Thanks. This M9 does okay with a R72 filter in terms of usage compared to my DSLRs I tried. It has shorter shutter speeds plus it can focus and compose with the filter on.

[Tin Can]

Great idea and execution

There will be copycats

:cool:


Cheapest way to do digital IR, if you already have a dumbphone.

217062

iPhone while holding the IR72 filter in front of the lens.
De-saturated, then adjusted levels in PS.

[Ari]

Great idea and execution

There will be copycats

:cool:

I'm sure I'm a copycat!

[jon.oman]

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51279711231_37bc9261a8_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2m8pVAg)
River Walk (https://flic.kr/p/2m8pVAg) by tuco (https://www.flickr.com/photos/yo_tuco/), on Flickr

M9, Voigtländer Nokton 50mm, R72

Nice!

[tuco]

Nice!

Thanks Jon

[tuco]

I ordered a filter stepper ring for this lens and trying it out with the IR filter.
M9, Zeiss Biogon 25mm, Hoya R72

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51289165374_34c0f1ecc8_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2m9fnYJ)
Evergreen Cemetery (https://flic.kr/p/2m9fnYJ) by tuco (https://www.flickr.com/photos/yo_tuco/), on Flickr



https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51287759237_375b27b32d_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2m98aYZ)
Evergreen Cemetery (https://flic.kr/p/2m98aYZ) by tuco (https://www.flickr.com/photos/yo_tuco/), on Flickr

[Peter De Smidt]

I ordered a filter stepper ring for this lens and trying it out with the IR filter.
M9, Zeiss Biogon 25mm, Hoya R72


That worked out well!

[tuco]

That worked out well!

Thanks.

My D810 conversion is going to be on hold. I sold off some of my primes for that system and have relied on some bulky zooms to fill the focal length gaps. But after trying the zooms out with the R72 filter, they didn't do so well with having a hot spot compared to the lenses I've been using on the M9.

[Peter De Smidt]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/z86rdkr88fiq8hx/1871C.jpg?raw=1[/img]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/6p1khu9q2pjin1j/1875B%20.jpg?raw=1
1875

[Peter De Smidt]

Tuco, I'm sorry to hear about the problems with your zooms.

[Ari]

Tuco, it's tough knowing which are the hotspot-prone lenses. Zooms can be more affected than primes.
Every IR conversion company has a list, published on their website, of good and not-so-good lenses for IR.
A lot of them are excellent lenses for regular digital photography, but don't work so well with IR.
One problem with the lists is that some caveats come with them, results can be subjective: tested incorrectly, under improper conditions or settings, or the lens could be suffering from some unknown issue.
And from what I've read, you're also more likely to get hotspots if you use a filter on your lens vs. converting your camera.

[jon.oman]

I've tested a few Nikkor lenses with my Nikon D700.

AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED works great across the whole range of mm's and from wide open to f22. Past f11, it becomes diffraction limited though.
AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8E ED VR works great across the whole range of mm's, but starts to get a hot-spot at about f8.
AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/4G ED VR - not tested yet.
AF-S Nikkor 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR - not test yet.

I have a few older Sigma lenses I have not tested either.

[tuco]

Tuco, it's tough knowing which are the hotspot-prone lenses. Zooms can be more affected than primes.
Every IR conversion company has a list, published on their website, of good and not-so-good lenses for IR.
A lot of them are excellent lenses for regular digital photography, but don't work so well with IR.
One problem with the lists is that some caveats come with them, results can be subjective: tested incorrectly, under improper conditions or settings, or the lens could be suffering from some unknown issue.
And from what I've read, you're also more likely to get hotspots if you use a filter on your lens vs. converting your camera.



I've tested a few Nikkor lenses with my Nikon D700.

AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED works great across the whole range of mm's and from wide open to f22. Past f11, it becomes diffraction limited though.
AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8E ED VR works great across the whole range of mm's, but starts to get a hot-spot at about f8.
AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/4G ED VR - not tested yet.
AF-S Nikkor 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR - not test yet.

I have a few older Sigma lenses I have not tested either.

Thanks for the info.

[tuco]

BTW, Peter, that broken house is a good find.

Another cemetery shot with M9/25mm combo

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51289493585_92290ba13c_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2m9h4xx)
Evergreen Cemetery (https://flic.kr/p/2m9h4xx) by tuco (https://www.flickr.com/photos/yo_tuco/), on Flickr

[Audii-Dudii]

A friend's wife suffered a stroke five weeks ago and returned home this past weekend. Having some experience as a caretaker, I offered to spend the weekend helping out as she made the transition home and they both adjusted to their new normal situation.

This resulted in me spending some time in an older part of the Phoenix metropolitan area where I hadn't previously photographed, so when I was able to get outside for a few minutes in the early morning, I wandered around a bit with my IR camera and took a handful of handheld photos, including this one around 6:15 am today:

https://i.imgur.com/Qu52Mgi.jpg

DIY modified, full-spectrum Samsung NX500 | Contax N 24-85 | Hoya R72 | ISO 100 and 1/40 @ f8

[Audii-Dudii]

Peter & Tuco:

Those are some very nice photos you both posted recently ... nicely seen and captured! :)

[tuco]

Those are some very nice photos you both posted recently...
...

DIY modified, full-spectrum ... Hoya R72 | ISO 100 and 1/40 @ f8

Thanks.

My Hoya R72 advertises a filter factor of 4.0 (2-stops) on the back of its case. Using it on my camera is like using a NDX400 (9-stop) ND filter. But seeing your exposure on a full-spectrum camera its within a couple of stops faster than the Sunny 16 Rule assuming a 2-stop correction for an overcast day, 1-stop for low morning Sun altitude and the 2-stop filter factor to the rule. That's not bad.

[Peter De Smidt]

Peter & Tuco:

Those are some very nice photos you both posted recently ... nicely seen and captured! :)

Thanks, Jeffrey. I'm getting a bit better at it.

[Peter De Smidt]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/endio20dehijrle/FDL_Gothic.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/m88opx8k85rrqb8/FDL%20Gothic%202.jpg?raw=1

[tuco]

I like the 2nd one Peter.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51302647860_56ee05309a_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2martRo)
Evergreen Cemetery (https://flic.kr/p/2martRo) by tuco (https://www.flickr.com/photos/yo_tuco/), on Flickr


https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51301783358_77db775cee_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2man3Sb)
Evergreen Cemetery (https://flic.kr/p/2man3Sb) by tuco (https://www.flickr.com/photos/yo_tuco/), on Flickr

M9, Zeiss 25mm, Hoya R72

[Peter De Smidt]

Thanks, Tuco. Really well done with the ziggurat photo. The framing is excellent, particularly the shadow along the bottom. Your M9 photos are definitely sharper than my D600 ones.

[jon.oman]

Peter and Tuco, nice images! Peter, you seem to have an endless supply of old buildings with great character to photograph.

With my Nikon D700, I had it converted to focus with the Live View. That allows me to use all of my lenses, since the focusing is done on the sensor. Trouble is, it seems I always have to use a tripod. With my other converted cameras, I selected a specific lens to use with the camera. I could then hand hold the camera and focus normally through the viewfinder. If I focus through the viewfinder on the converted D700, the focus seems to be off.

There is a way to hand hold the D700 using live view, but it does not focus via the sensor. It uses the same focus method that is used if you were using the viewfinder/mirror.

The manual says that focus may not work for live view in tripod mode if the camera is not on a tripod. Well, of course I had to test this. After a bit of trial and error here is what I got:

https://www.gophotog.org/allphotos/infrared/large_photos/D7F_6016.jpg
f/8 1/4000 sec 5000 ISO 70 mm

https://www.gophotog.org/allphotos/infrared/large_photos/D7F_6023.jpg
f/14 1/1250 sec 5000 ISO 70 mm

24-70 f2.8 IF EX DG Sigma

I jacked up the ISO to get some 'grain', and handle my sometime shaky hands.

[alan_b]

A couple from the other day in Seattle.

Nikon D800 full spectrum:
B&W with PC-E 24mm, B+W 093 filter
Color (stitched) 55/3.5 Micro AI'd, Kolari IR Chrome filter.

Edit: thanks Jon for the formatting info!

https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=217463&d=1625952736

https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=217464&d=1625952758

[jon.oman]

https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=217463&d=1625952736

When I clicked on your images, I got the large image. I then right clicked on that image and selected: "Open image in new tab". Finally, I copied the URL of that image that appeared in the new tab. Started a new message. Selected the 'Insert Image' icon, and clicking on the 'URL tab', and then pasting the URL into the line, and deselecting the check box.

By the way, nice image!

[Peter De Smidt]

Interesting stuff, Jon and Alan!

I visited Whitnall Park in Hales Corners for the first time today. At this point of the summer, the waterfall, well, here it is:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/txkbnc1rsrk6ye1/Whitnall_Falls.jpg?raw=1

[tuco]

Thanks, Tuco. Really well done with the ziggurat photo. The framing is excellent, particularly the shadow along the bottom. Your M9 photos are definitely sharper than my D600 ones.

Thanks. Yeah that Zeiss 25mm does a sharper job than my other two lenses I have for the system.

[tuco]

More of the same

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51305419094_eda0050d14_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2maFFDh)
Evergreen Cemetery (https://flic.kr/p/2maFFDh) by tuco (https://www.flickr.com/photos/yo_tuco/), on Flickr

[jon.oman]

A few from today.

https://www.gophotog.org/allphotos/infrared/large_photos/D7F_6032.jpg
f/8 1/500 sec 1600 ISO 38mm

https://www.gophotog.org/allphotos/infrared/large_photos/D7F_6031.jpg
f/8 1/500 sec 1600 ISO 24mm

https://www.gophotog.org/allphotos/infrared/large_photos/D7F_6030.jpg
f/8 1/2000 sec 1600 ISO 35mm

24-70 f2.8 IF EX DG Sigma

[jon.oman]

I've tested a few Nikkor lenses with my Nikon D700.

AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED works great across the whole range of mm's and from wide open to f22. Past f11, it becomes diffraction limited though.
AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8E ED VR works great across the whole range of mm's, but starts to get a hot-spot at about f8.
AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/4G ED VR - not tested yet.
AF-S Nikkor 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR - not test yet.

I have a few older Sigma lenses I have not tested either.

I tested my 200-500 today. I did not find any hot-spots.

https://www.gophotog.org/allphotos/infrared/large_photos/D7F_6039.jpg
F8 : 1/800 sec : 200 ISO : 200 mm

https://www.gophotog.org/allphotos/infrared/large_photos/D7F_6040.jpg
F11 : 1/320 sec : 200 ISO : 200 mm

https://www.gophotog.org/allphotos/infrared/large_photos/D7F_6041.jpg
F16 : 1/160 sec : 200 ISO : 200 mm

https://www.gophotog.org/allphotos/infrared/large_photos/D7F_6042.jpg
F22 : 1/80 sec : 200 ISO : 200 mm

[jon.oman]

Magnolia Gardens has a small plantation cemetery. Here is one gravesite.

https://www.gophotog.org/allphotos/infrared/large_photos/D7F_6050.jpg

[Peter De Smidt]

That's good news, Jon. The subtle color variations are interesting.

[jon.oman]

That's good news, Jon. The subtle color variations are interesting.

I have a Photoshop action that helps me with that.

Since I am using Live View on my Nikon D700 to focus and frame the image, I am finding it difficult to do it in bright sunlight. The light just washes it out! So, I ordered the following device to help me out:

https://static.bhphoto.com/images/images500x500/1624269940_1129189.jpg

This gets attached to the LCD screen on the back of the camera. It should eliminate the glare. Reviews say it works very well. I should get it via UPS on Monday.

[tuco]

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51308923547_05bf30ff8f_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2maZDoT)
Old Ford (https://flic.kr/p/2maZDoT) by tuco (https://www.flickr.com/photos/yo_tuco/), on Flickr

M9, Zeiss 35/2, R72

[Peter De Smidt]

Ha, Tuco. You beat me too it! I have a very similar scene that I've driven by, but I haven't gotten around to photographing it yet. The light foliage sets of the dark truck nicely.

[Audii-Dudii]

I have a Photoshop action that helps me with that.

Since I am using Live View on my Nikon D700 to focus and frame the image, I am finding it difficult to do it in bright sunlight. The light just washes it out! So, I ordered the following device to help me out:

https://static.bhphoto.com/images/images500x500/1624269940_1129189.jpg

This gets attached to the LCD screen on the back of the camera. It should eliminate the glare. Reviews say it works very well. I should get it via UPS on Monday.

As another data point, I had to do something similar with my NX500 full-spectrum camera for the same reason and although the installation looks a bit clunky / funky, it works very well indeed:

https://i.imgur.com/iugL9q3.jpg

Here's hoping the same proves true for you and your setup!

[Peter De Smidt]

That looks like a very workable setup to me!

[tuco]

Ha, Tuco. You beat me too it! I have a very similar scene that I've driven by, but I haven't gotten around to photographing it yet. The light foliage sets of the dark truck nicely.

Thanks.

[jon.oman]

As another data point, I had to do something similar with my NX500 full-spectrum camera for the same reason and although the installation looks a bit clunky / funky, it works very well indeed:

https://i.imgur.com/iugL9q3.jpg

Here's hoping the same proves true for you and your setup!

Well, that is good to know! The reviews said it works. Thanks for the additional confirmation!

[jon.oman]

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51308923547_05bf30ff8f_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2maZDoT)
Old Ford (https://flic.kr/p/2maZDoT) by tuco (https://www.flickr.com/photos/yo_tuco/), on Flickr

M9, Zeiss 35/2, R72

Nice one! I have to laugh about the planter on the bumper!

[tuco]

Nice one! I have to laugh about the planter on the bumper!

Thanks Jon.

[jon.oman]

I've tested a few Nikkor lenses with my Nikon D700.

AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED works great across the whole range of mm's and from wide open to f22. Past f11, it becomes diffraction limited though.
AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8E ED VR works great across the whole range of mm's, but starts to get a hot-spot at about f8.
AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/4G ED VR - not tested yet.
AF-S Nikkor 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR - not test yet.

I have a few older Sigma lenses I have not tested either.

Okay, I tested the 70-200 today. No hot-spots detected. Here is a shot at f/16:

https://www.gophotog.org/allphotos/infrared/large_photos/D7F_6065.jpg
f/16 : 1/25 sec : -4/6 EV : 200 ISO : 135 mm : VR on (handheld)

So, the lens I would use the most (the 24-70) has the most issues. I'll just have to keep it below f8!

[jon.oman]

Reprocessed one of the previous images.

https://www.gophotog.org/allphotos/infrared/large_photos/D7F_6042BW.jpg

I did get chased out to the park that day. Made it to my truck just before the rain started.

[Tom Monego]

A Torii for a friend, built by John Lee. Terry past way too early, John built this Torrii for him along the Connecticut River.
Leica M8 at Canon 25mm f3.5 160 ISO 093 B+W filter.
217590

[tuco]

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51316108534_fb55b4a5a2_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2mbCteY)
The Evergreen Cemetery Strong-arm Tree (https://flic.kr/p/2mbCteY) by tuco (https://www.flickr.com/photos/yo_tuco/), on Flickr

M9, Zeiss 35/2, R72

[jon.oman]

https://www.gophotog.org/allphotos/infrared/large_photos/D7F_6027BW.jpg

[Audii-Dudii]

I've driven past this scene every morning for the past few weeks and this morning, I finally had a camera with me:

https://i.imgur.com/FxcxLZE.jpg

DIY modified, full-spectrum Samsung NX500 | Contax N 24-85 @24 mm | ISO 100 @ f8 and 1/125 | Hoya R72

[Audii-Dudii]

And here's a pair of photos from today's early morning walk with Miss Abby:

https://i.imgur.com/sPA3O7u.jpg

DIY modified, full-spectrum Samsung NX500 | Contax N 24-85 @35 mm | ISO 100 @ f8 and 1/60 | Hoya R72

https://i.imgur.com/e52BOw3.jpg

DIY modified, full-spectrum Samsung NX500 | Contax N 24-85 @35 mm | ISO 100 @ f8 and 1/60 | Hoya R72

[tuco]

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51331296971_fdfb97485d_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2mcYjez)
Mukilteo Lighthouse (https://flic.kr/p/2mcYjez) by tuco (https://www.flickr.com/photos/yo_tuco/), on Flickr

M9, Zeiss 25mm, R72

[tuco]

Another of the lighthouse with the M9, 25mm and R72.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51332360721_b63b170630_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2md4Ls6)
Mukilteo Lighthouse (https://flic.kr/p/2md4Ls6) by tuco (https://www.flickr.com/photos/yo_tuco/), on Flickr

[jon.oman]

https://www.gophotog.org/allphotos/infrared/large_photos/D7F_6092-Edit.jpg

[jon.oman]

I've tested a few Nikkor lenses with my Nikon D700.

AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED works great across the whole range of mm's and from wide open to f22. Past f11, it becomes diffraction limited though.
AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8E ED VR works great across the whole range of mm's, but starts to get a hot-spot at about f8.
AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/4G ED VR - not tested yet.
AF-S Nikkor 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR - not test yet.

I have a few older Sigma lenses I have not tested either.

I removed the UV filter from my Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 IF EX DG, and the slight problem with hot-spots I was having disappeared. I'll have to try that with my Nikkor 24-70 as well.

[jon.oman]

By the way, nice images everyone! Keep them coming!

[jon.oman]

https://www.gophotog.org/allphotos/infrared/large_photos/D7F_6132-Edit.jpg

It was a wet and rainy day.....

[tuco]

It was a wet and rainy day.....

I think I have the same drill press (14" Jet). And I use the same kind of vice clamp too, ha.

[jon.oman]

I think I have the same drill press (14" Jet). And I use the same kind of vice clamp too, ha.

You are correct! I've had it for over 20 years. It has seen a lot of use.

[tuco]

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51342522574_4847cc856a_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2mdXRds)
Jet Drill Press (https://flic.kr/p/2mdXRds) by tuco (https://www.flickr.com/photos/yo_tuco/), on Flickr

M9, Zeiss 35mm, R72

[jon.oman]

Now, that is cool! Also cleaner than mine!

I would never be able to get mine outdoors either. So, no clouds!

It is in motion.....

[tuco]

Mine was by the garage door and it was a short distance to drag it outside. That corner needed cleaning anyway. I powered it off and then took the picture while it coasted to a stop.

[jon.oman]

https://www.gophotog.org/allphotos/infrared/large_photos/D7F_6146-Edit2.jpg

[Peter De Smidt]

Well done, Jon!

[jon.oman]

Well done, Jon!

Thanks Peter!

[Peter De Smidt]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/2roxqv5ecnkyu1a/Red_House_3.jpg?raw=1

[jon.oman]

Nice one Peter!

You seem to have an endless supply of neat old buildings to photograph!

This one still looks lived in.

[tuco]

Yeah nice Jon. It has some personality.

And another nice old house find Peter. I've been too busy to get out and look for pictures lately.

[jon.oman]

Yeah nice Jon. It has some personality.

And another nice old house find Peter. I've been too busy to get out and look for pictures lately.

Thanks!

I was just looking at your Flickr gallery. Ran across the Dennis Ritchie / Hello World image. Brings back memories. I had the first edition of the book. Then the second edition. It was my bible for many years. I did a lot of C programming, as well as assembler. The old DEC Rainbow 100. CP/M. Pre-MSDOS. Then Texas Instruments Unix systems and their IBM-PC clone. A bit hard to compile that hello world program on the typewriter!

[Peter De Smidt]

Thanks, Guys. I don't think that house is lived in. It's in the front yard of a much newer (and lived in) house. The people there are basically using the old house as a lawn ornament.

With Covid, we take drives to get out of the house, and I'm trying to cover as many of the local backroads as I can. Zooming in on Google maps and looking searching the area for attractions has lead to some interesting finds.

[tuco]

Thanks!

I was just looking at your Flickr gallery. Ran across the Dennis Ritchie / Hello World image. Brings back memories. I had the first edition of the book. Then the second edition. It was my bible for many years. I did a lot of C programming, as well as assembler. The old DEC Rainbow 100. CP/M. Pre-MSDOS. Then Texas Instruments Unix systems and their IBM-PC clone. A bit hard to compile that hello world program on the typewriter!

Okay, that's cool. I think programming in C today is like programming in assembler back before OOP. I've put some inline 80286 assembly in some C-source on occasion. I have two copies of Ritchie's book. One in nice shape and one with a lot wear and tear. In retrospect, I should have used that book in the picture instead.

I also took that Hello World picture on Provia 100F. But I made a mistake loading the film while developing it and got a light leak streak on it. It was in better overall focus than the BW for some reason. I must have made a change and forgot to recheck the focus setup on the BW.

[Peter De Smidt]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/czhf20hc4gzjihr/Plane_Field_2.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/c3xlfadvuf68c5h/Barn_Twin_Silos.jpg?raw=1

[T.Chabry]

Shot with a Sony DSC-V1 camera
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50677424952_96d63fa9ba_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2kdc3S5)
Infrared (https://flic.kr/p/2kdc3S5) by T. Chabry (https://www.flickr.com/photos/191014911@N03/), on Flickr

[jon.oman]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/czhf20hc4gzjihr/Plane_Field_2.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/c3xlfadvuf68c5h/Barn_Twin_Silos.jpg?raw=1

A couple of real nice ones Peter!

I really like the second one. Sky, barn, fence, the whole thing!

The plane makes the first image. Which brings up a story.

My daughter was a crew chief for the F16 jets in the Air Force. She would take them apart and put them back together. She spent at least one rotation in Iraq. Anyway, when she got out, she got a job at a small airport in Iowa. Her job was to rehab airplanes like the one in your photo. She would take the fabric off the plane, use it as a template, cut a new skin, and sew it together. It then got put back on the plane and 'doped' with glue. Finally, the plane was repainted. Good as new.

After a couple of years of that, she went back to school and got a nursing degree! She has been working as a nurse for about ten years now.

[jon.oman]

Shot with a Sony DSC-V1 camera
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50677424952_96d63fa9ba_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2kdc3S5)
Infrared (https://flic.kr/p/2kdc3S5) by T. Chabry (https://www.flickr.com/photos/191014911@N03/), on Flickr

Nice image! The reflection really makes it!

[Peter De Smidt]

Thanks, Jon. Terrific story!

[T.Chabry]

Thank you Jon.



I really like the second one. Sky, barn, fence, the whole thing!


Me too. Wow! I didn't have much interest in digital IR photos but when I see one like this, it makes me want to get the camera out again.

[Ari]

Shot with a Sony DSC-V1 camera
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50677424952_96d63fa9ba_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2kdc3S5)
Infrared (https://flic.kr/p/2kdc3S5) by T. Chabry (https://www.flickr.com/photos/191014911@N03/), on Flickr

Nice image. What kind of camera and filter are you using?

[T.Chabry]

Thanks. The camera is the Sony DSC-V1 with the magnet hack for daylight shooting as explained here:
https://kiwiinkyushu.wordpress.com/2016/04/13/sony-dsc-v1-infrared-magnet-hack/

I'm not sure about the filters, it has been a while but I think I used a Massa IR filter 850 and a K&F Concept ND8.

[Ari]

Never heard of this magnet hack. How did someone figure this out in the first place?
Anyway, nicely done.

[Peter De Smidt]

That magnet hack is a cool trick.

[Peter De Smidt]

Me too. Wow! I didn't have much interest in digital IR photos but when I see one like this, it makes me want to get the camera out again.

That's kind of you to say. Thanks!

[Peter De Smidt]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/vhgxmh1vuvbu5nl/Old_House.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/znijozw2fbrt13i/Dagget_Montello.jpg?raw=1
Daggett Memorial Park, Montello

[Tin Can]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/vhgxmh1vuvbu5nl/Old_House.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/znijozw2fbrt13i/Dagget_Montello.jpg?raw=1
Daggett Memorial Park, Montello

[jon.oman]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/vhgxmh1vuvbu5nl/Old_House.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/znijozw2fbrt13i/Dagget_Montello.jpg?raw=1
Daggett Memorial Park, Montello

Wow! Very nice. And right in the town of Montello. I looked it up and read the history.

Another great house! This one looks out in the country. You must enjoy your rides....

[Peter De Smidt]

Thanks, Guys. Yeah, during Covid our main entertainment on weekends is going for drives. Montello is about an hour drive going west.

[tuco]

Really good posts Peter. The waterfall is inspirational.

[Peter De Smidt]

Thanks, Tuco. It's been fun.

[Jody_S]

While I do have a stash of 35mm Kodak HIE, a box or two of Rollei IR 4x5, 275 square feet of 12" wide Konica infrared film, and assorted infrared-capable flashes and light meters, this thread has convinced me that digital is 100% where it's at for infrared imaging.

[Ari]

While I do have a stash of 35mm Kodak HIE, a box or two of Rollei IR 4x5, 275 square feet of 12" wide Konica infrared film, and assorted infrared-capable flashes and light meters, this thread has convinced me that digital is 100% where it's at for infrared imaging.

I agree, Jody.
I've spent the last 3 months on a veritable IR binge, even going so far as to inquire with a film manufacturer about getting HIE made again (too expensive, no one will do it).
I shot about 150 rolls of bulk-loaded 35mm, almost as much 120 film, and now I'm ready to shoot IR digitally. Current IR film is just too weak for me to keep spending money on, i.e., it's not really IR, it's a pale substitute for the HIE of old.
But I'm glad I went through all that IR film, I got it out of my system and I'm set to move forward.
This week, I'll receive two IR-converted cameras, one tuned to 830nm, the other to 950nm. I'll keep whichever suits me better.

[Peter De Smidt]

Ari, I'm looking forward to seeing some of your pictures!

https://www.dropbox.com/s/7mhthsm9tj6d3ct/Dagget_Falls_2.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/c5k8ew3usb0xfnj/Dagget_Falls_3.jpg?raw=1

https://www.dropbox.com/s/7d0ooew2zt5gru1/Daggett_Falls_6.jpg?raw=1

[Ari]

Thanks, Peter. And I look forward to more of yours.

[jon.oman]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/7d0ooew2zt5gru1/Daggett_Falls_6.jpg?raw=1

Peter, I really like this image. The small chapel sets it off!

[jon.oman]

I ran across a really good infrared tutorial. It would be really helpful for someone first coming into digital infrared photography. It is Adobe Lightroom Classic centric though. Still a good read for anyone starting out.

The main link: https://robertreiser.photography/infrared-photography-tutorial/

How to set the proper white balance (camera profile): https://robertreiser.photography/proper-infrared-white-balance-in-lightroom/

How to avoid diffraction in infrared photography: https://robertreiser.photography/diffraction-in-infrared-photography/

[Peter De Smidt]

That's kind of you to say, Jon, and thank you for the links. I've been mainly shooting at f/8. I'll have to try shooting more wide open.

This is what I've been doing, which is not to say it's a "best practice" or anything.

I focus normally, and then switch the camera to manual focus, if needed. Adjust focus to the IR mark on the lens. I set my exposure to a guess. (I've been taking a lot of IR photos lately, and so I'm pretty good at guessing.) Put the filter on the camera. Block the viewfinder. Take the picture. My exposure times are normally between about 15 seconds and 2.5 minutes. The photos will eventually pop up on the camera's LCD. It will be red. I don't care. I look at the RGB histogram, making sure that the red channel isn't clipped on either edge. If it is. Adjust. Sometimes I focus stack. I did with the barn to make the front fence sharper.

I don't like any kind of stacking, generally, as leaves move....

I have photos of the barn at f/11, f/8 and f/4. F/8 is sharper than f/11, but in this case my f/8 shot is sharper than f/4. Maybe I wasn't accurate enough adjusting to the IR mark.

[Ari]

Thanks, Jon. I had that bookmarked for when my camera arrives, but I wanted to try it out first before recommending it.
It's the best all-around solution I've found so far, though, so I hope it means relatively smooth sailing for novice digital IR shooters like me.

[jon.oman]

That's kind of you to say, Jon, and thank you for the links. I've been mainly shooting at f/8. I'll have to try shooting more wide open.

This is what I've been doing, which is not to say it's a "best practice" or anything.

I focus normally, and then switch the camera to manual focus, if needed. Adjust focus to the IR mark on the lens. I set my exposure to a guess. (I've been taking a lot of IR photos lately, and so I'm pretty good at guessing.) Put the filter on the camera. Block the viewfinder. Take the picture. My exposure times are normally between about 15 seconds and 2.5 minutes. The photos will eventually pop up on the camera's LCD. It will be red. I don't care. I look at the RGB histogram, making sure that the red channel isn't clipped on either edge. If it is. Adjust. Sometimes I focus stack. I did with the barn to make the front fence sharper.

I don't like any kind of stacking, generally, as leaves move....

I have photos of the barn at f/11, f/8 and f/4. F/8 is sharper than f/11, but in this case my f/8 shot is sharper than f/4. Maybe I wasn't accurate enough adjusting to the IR mark.

Peter, One of the benefits of a converted camera is that you do not have to worry about the IR mark on the lens. The conversion takes care of that for you. There are two conversions. To a specific lens, or to 'live view'. I'm talking a DSLR here. If it is to a specific lens, that is the only lens you can use. If it is live view, you can use any lens you have.

Because of the conversion, you can use auto focus. You do not have to fiddle with the dark filters you can not see through. You can hand hold the camera. You only lose about one to two stops of light compared to a non-converted camera.

It is even better if the camera is a mirrorless camera. The type of focus is even better, and the conversion is easier.

[Peter De Smidt]

Jon,

I use a lot of lenses, including manual focus ones. Right now, I'm leaning towards getting a new main camera and having my D600 converted to 720nm. I can probably afford a new camera....but there's no way I can afford replacing my lenses with similar lenses for mirrorless. I'll stick with a dslr for my next camera.

[jon.oman]

Jon,

I use a lot of lenses, including manual focus ones. Right now, I'm leaning towards getting a new main camera and having my D600 converted to 720nm. I can probably afford a new camera....but there's no way I can afford replacing my lenses with similar lenses for mirrorless. I'll stick with a dslr for my next camera.

New or used? I have had good luck with keh.com. I try to buy EX or EX+.

My next camera will probably be something like the Nikon z7 with the FTZ adaptor. That will allow me to use all my current lenses, even the manual focus ones. Like the Nikkor 300 mm AIS I have.

I could then have it converted at lifepixel.com to full spectrum. The advantage is that the camera can still be used as a normal camera and take normal images, and also take the full range of infrared images. They talk about it here: https://www.lifepixel.com/shop/our-services/full-spectrum-camera-conversion/nikon-mirrorless-full-spectrum-conversion

Just another option.

[Ari]

Forgive the terrible photo, I just wanted some fresh eyes on this image.
The Sony a77 arrived today, with its 830nm converted sensor, and I love the camera as well as the conversion (LifePixel).
I've spent most of the afternoon tweaking camera settings and Lightroom sliders.
This is the last image I made, it's almost straight out of the camera. Only saturation, highlights, blacks and contrast were used here, and very minimally.
Camera was set to B&W and underexposed by 1/3 stop. Custom white balance applied in-camera.
ISO 320, f/5.6, 1/500s

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51355682573_baabcd7214_b.jpg (https://www.flickr.com/gp/zsari/17ngd4)

[Peter De Smidt]

Ari,

That's certainly a very strong IR effect, stronger than what my R72 filter gives.

I opened the image in Photoshop, duplicated the layer, and applied adjustment/shadows hghlights, playing with the shadow slider. There's quite a bit of shadow detail that isn't visible on the web image. That 's a good thing as the web image looks a bit under exposed.

[Ari]

Thanks, Peter. It's deliberately underexposed, I didn't want to lose any highlights.
I'm going to fiddle some more with both camera and LR to find a more optimal setting.

[Peter De Smidt]

Gotchya Ari. As I said, there is a lot of shadow info in the file.

[alan_b]

Lots of great images - love the waterfall shots Peter!

[alan_b]

https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=218322&d=1628101651
D800 full spectrum 45mm PC-E shift-stitched B+W 093 filter

[Ari]

Changed some in-camera settings and went through the procedure to create a DMG profile, both of which helped.
And I also went to my usual IR testing ground, the local Bubbledome surrounded by trees.
There was sun, but much of it was through clouds, mostly overcast all day.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51357392302_af494b3bf4_b.jpg (https://www.flickr.com/gp/zsari/ppv0P2)

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51357392267_6ce39a4be0_b.jpg (https://www.flickr.com/gp/zsari/0259nc)

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51358368373_4e206019b8_b.jpg (https://www.flickr.com/gp/zsari/M85kk1)

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51358874659_fee3962bd9_b.jpg (https://www.flickr.com/gp/zsari/5vC004)

[Peter De Smidt]

Looking good, Ari!

"Lots of great images - love the waterfall shots Peter!"
Thanks, Alan!

[jon.oman]

Changed some in-camera settings and went through the procedure to create a DMG profile, both of which helped.
And I also went to my usual IR testing ground, the local Bubbledome surrounded by trees.
There was sun, but much of it was through clouds, mostly overcast all day.



Your images give me an idea of what I will be getting soon with a converted Nikon D2x. It is at lifepixel right now, waiting to be converted from 720 nm to 830 nm. I wanted to try the deep B&W IR in the bright sun of South Carolina!

As Peter said, "looking good"!

[Ari]

Thanks, Jon.
I'll also be getting a 950nm conversion in the next few days. It was done by Isaac Szabo, I'll post a short review of that later on.
I had that one done because that's what I wanted all along, but only Isaac was willing and able to do 950nm.
My goal is to get something approximating the old Kodak HIE, which was sensitive to ~930nm and had some really beautiful softness and grain.
Here's another version of one of the above shots, trying to get an HIE look:

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51358085997_98c7b2d30b_h.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2mfkBFk)

I know it needs more grain, but so far I haven't found a good way of making digital grain.

[Peter De Smidt]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/q7nwjcgp3jhkkou/ari.JPG?raw=1

[Ari]

Not bad.
Which of the lesser of all evils did you use, Peter?

[Peter De Smidt]

Photoshop>Filter>Add Noise>Gaussian-monochromatic-5.82%

Sharpening will greatly affect the appearance of grain. You might one to add it have sharpening for a specific size image. (Web will be different from print....)
There are lots of other 'grain adding' options, but I haven't looked into them.

[Ari]

I have a version of the photo using the same steps you outlined, but only 4% strength.
I prefer shooting at slightly higher ISO, that way there's some "native" grain being imparted.
It may be that digital grain will always looks fake to me.

[Peter De Smidt]

Yeah, I get that.

You're right that certain digital settings will give more grain, but higher ISOs will also have less dynamic range.

There are so many ways to do this, including using a scan of film grain.

You could add grain at different sizes, including at different luminosity ranges....

Or you could just say, "This is a new medium. It has it's own characteristics...."

[jon.oman]

https://www.gophotog.org/allphotos/infrared/large_photos/D7F_6149-Edit-2.jpg

A home in downtown Summerville, South Carolina.

[alan_b]

Not to get too into the weeds here...

If you have Capture One, it has a pretty good grain feature.

Here's a comparison on the last image I posted between PS Gaussian noise and C1 "Silver Rich" grain. The difference to my eye is C1 erodes sharp details and aliasing in a more organic way. This is extreme pixel peeping with fine grain, but the same holds for larger grain effects at lower magnifications.

218350 218349

[Peter De Smidt]

A home in downtown Summerville, South Carolina.

Well done, Jon!

[Peter De Smidt]

Good to know, Alan. Thanks!

[Ari]

https://www.gophotog.org/allphotos/infrared/large_photos/D7F_6149-Edit-2.jpg

A home in downtown Summerville, South Carolina.

Beautiful, Jon.